Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Atypical and Malignant Breast Pathology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Breast Disease

  • 2264 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides the basis for surgeons to better understand the malignant and premalignant pathology of breast conditions, which will facilitate communication between surgeons and pathologists, eventually leading to better patient care. Breast pathology as a field has become very complex, rapidly evolving with new observations and concepts. It has to be emphasized that there is no consensus in some areas of breast pathology, as even the most qualified experts may disagree on the interpretation of certain lesions. Furthermore, the interpretation of some lesions that do not present in a clear category may require specific training and expertise.

Although the WHO classification system for breast tumors provides the basis for the histological classification, the molecular classification of breast tumors has become readily available and has gained popularity in recent years. For now, it is not clear if the two classification systems will be combined or if one will become more useful in helping us to manage our breast cancer patients. The most likely outcome is a system that combines the best aspects of these classifications to provide improved diagnostic and prognostic capability. However, until such a combination is available, we will continue to utilize the two classification systems together.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

ADH:

Atypical ductal hyperplasia

ALH:

Atypical lobular hyperplasia

ASCO/CAP:

American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists

CMF:

Carcinomas with medullary features

DCIS:

Ductal carcinoma in situ

DIALH:

Ductal involvement by cells of atypical lobular hyperplasia

ER:

Estrogen receptor

FEA:

Flat epithelial atypia

HER2:

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2

HPF:

High-power field

IHC:

Immunohistochemistry

IMPC:

Invasive micropapillary carcinoma

MC:

Mucinous carcinoma

PD:

Paget’s disease

PLCIS:

Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ

PR:

Progesterone receptor

PT:

Phyllodes tumor

TC:

Tubular carcinoma

TDLU:

Terminal duct lobular unit

References

  1. Tavassoli FA, Norris HJ. A comparison of the results of long-term follow-up for atypical intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal hyperplasia of the breast. Cancer. 1990;65(3):518–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Rados MS. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer. 1985;55(11):2698–708.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, Fechner RE, Kempson RL, Gelman R, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16(12):1133–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Simpson PT, Reis-Filho JS, Gale T, Lakhani SR. Molecular evolution of breast cancer. J Pathol. 2005;205(2):248–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Otterbach F, Bankfalvi A, Bergner S, Decker T, Krech R, Boecker W. Cytokeratin 5/6 immunohistochemistry assists the differential diagnosis of atypical proliferations of the breast. Histopathology. 2000;37(3):232–40.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Lennington WJ, Jensen RA, Dalton LW, Page DL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Heterogeneity of individual lesions. Cancer. 1994;73(1):118–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dahlstrom JE, Sutton S, Jain S. Histological precision of stereotactic core biopsy in diagnosis of malignant and premalignant breast lesions. Histopathology. 1996;28(6):537–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Rodriguez-Soto J, Marzoni Jr FA, Finkelstein SI, Shepard MJ. Stereotactic, automated, large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: false-negative and histologic underestimation rates after long-term follow-up. Radiology. 1999;210(3):799–805.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Shepard MJ, Finkelstein SI, Marzoni Jr FA. Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of 450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia. Radiology. 1994;193(1):91–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liberman L, Cohen MA, Dershaw DD, Abramson AF, Hann LE, Rosen PP. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: an indication for surgical biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;164(5):1111–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Moore MM, Hargett 3rd CW, Hanks JB, Fajardo LL, Harvey JA, Frierson Jr HF, et al. Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy. Ann Surg. 1997;225(6):726–31; discussion 31-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bassett L, Winchester DP, Caplan RB, Dershaw DD, Dowlatshahi K, Evans 3rd WP, et al. Stereotactic core-needle biopsy of the breast: a report of the Joint Task Force of the American College of Radiology, American College of Surgeons, and College of American Pathologists. CA Cancer J Clin. 1997;47(3):171–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Haagensen CD, Lane N, Lattes R, Bodian C. Lobular neoplasia (so-called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast. Cancer. 1978;42(2):737–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Page DL, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Jensen RA, Plummer Jr WD, Simpson JF. Atypical lobular hyperplasia as a unilateral predictor of breast cancer risk: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2003;361(9352):125–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW. Ductal involvement by cells of atypical lobular hyperplasia in the breast: a long-term follow-up study of cancer risk. Hum Pathol. 1988;19(2):201–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Elsheikh TM, Silverman JF. Follow-up surgical excision is indicated when breast core needle biopsies show atypical lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ: a correlative study of 33 patients with review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29(4):534–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhao C, Desouki MM, Florea A, Mohammed K, Li X, Dabbs D. Pathologic findings of follow-up surgical excision for lobular neoplasia on breast core biopsy performed for calcification. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;138(1):72–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver M, editors. Who classification of tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC Press; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Moinfar F. Flat ductal intraepithelial neoplasia of the breast: evolution of Azzopardi’s “clinging” concept. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2010;27(1):37–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schnitt SJ. Clinging carcinoma: an American perspective. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2010;27(1):31–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Abdel-Fatah TM, Powe DG, Hodi Z, Lee AH, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO. High frequency of coexistence of columnar cell lesions, lobular neoplasia, and low grade ductal carcinoma in situ with invasive tubular carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(3):417–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sahoo S, Recant WM. Triad of columnar cell alteration, lobular carcinoma in situ, and tubular carcinoma of the breast. Breast J. 2005;11(2):140–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bijker N, Peterse JL, Duchateau L, Julien JP, Fentiman IS, Duval C, et al. Risk factors for recurrence and metastasis after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma-in-situ: analysis of European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Trial 10853. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(8):2263–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Eusebi V, Feudale E, Foschini MP, Micheli A, Conti A, Riva C, et al. Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994;11(3):223–35.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Shaaban AM, Sloane JP, West CR, Moore FR, Jarvis C, Williams EM, et al. Histopathologic types of benign breast lesions and the risk of breast cancer: case-control study. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26(4):421–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Scott MA, Lagios MD, Axelsson K, Rogers LW, Anderson TJ, Page DL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: reproducibility of histological subtype analysis. Hum Pathol. 1997;28(8):967–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Holland R, Peterse JL, Millis RR, Eusebi V, Faverly D, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994;11(3):167–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Silverstein MJ, Poller DN, Waisman JR, Colburn WJ, Barth A, Gierson ED, et al. Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma-in-situ. Lancet. 1995;345(8958):1154–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lagios MD. Duct carcinoma in situ. Pathology and treatment. Surg Clin North Am. 1990;70(4):853–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Consensus Conference on the classification of ductal carcinoma in situ. The Consensus Conference Committee. Cancer. 1997;80(9):1798–802.

    Google Scholar 

  31. van Deurzen CH, Hobbelink MG, van Hillegersberg R, van Diest PJ. Is there an indication for sentinel node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast? A review. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(6):993–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Allred DC. Issues and updates: evaluating estrogen receptor-alpha, progesterone receptor, and HER2 in breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2010;23 Suppl 2:S52–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(16):2784–95.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang M, Moriya T, Oguma M, De La Cruz C, Endoh M, Ishida T, et al. Microinvasive ductal carcinoma (T1mic) of the breast. The clinicopathological profile and immunohistochemical features of 28 cases. Pathol Int. 2003;53(7):422–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Edge SB, editor. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. New York: Springer; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zavotsky J, Hansen N, Brennan MB, Turner RR, Giuliano AE. Lymph node metastasis from ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion. Cancer. 1999;85(11):2439–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Klauber-DeMore N, Tan LK, Liberman L, Kaptain S, Fey J, Borgen P, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy: is it indicated in patients with high-risk ductal carcinoma-in-situ and ductal carcinoma-in-situ with microinvasion? Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7(9):636–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Intra M, Zurrida S, Maffini F, Sonzogni A, Trifiro G, Gennari R, et al. Sentinel lymph node metastasis in microinvasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10(10):1160–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ellis IO, Galea M, Broughton N, Locker A, Blamey RW, Elston CW. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. II. Histological type. Relationship with survival in a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1992;20(6):479–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fisher ER, Gregorio RM, Fisher B, Redmond C, Vellios F, Sommers SC. The pathology of invasive breast cancer. A syllabus derived from findings of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (protocol no. 4). Cancer. 1975;36(1):1–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rosen PP. The pathological classification of human mammary carcinoma: past, present and future. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 1979;9(2):144–56.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Yaziji H, Gown AM. Accuracy and precision in HER2/neu testing in breast cancer: are we there yet? Hum Pathol. 2004;35(2):143–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Owens MA, Horten BC, Da Silva MM. HER2 amplification ratios by fluorescence in situ hybridization and correlation with immunohistochemistry in a cohort of 6556 breast cancer tissues. Clin Breast Cancer. 2004;5(1):63–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Allred DC, Brown P, Medina D. The origins of estrogen receptor alpha-positive and estrogen receptor alpha-negative human breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6(6):240–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE. Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. JAMA. 2003;289(11):1421–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR. Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2005;93(9):1046–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sastre-Garau X, Jouve M, Asselain B, Vincent-Salomon A, Beuzeboc P, Dorval T, et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Clinicopathologic analysis of 975 cases with reference to data on conservative therapy and metastatic patterns. Cancer. 1996;77(1):113–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Winchester DJ, Chang HR, Graves TA, Menck HR, Bland KI, Winchester DP. A comparative analysis of lobular and ductal carcinoma of the breast: presentation, treatment, and outcomes. J Am Coll Surg. 1998;186(4):416–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Silverstein MJ, Lewinsky BS, Waisman JR, Gierson ED, Colburn WJ, Senofsky GM, et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Is it different from infiltrating duct carcinoma? Cancer. 1994;73(6):1673–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. du Toit RS, Locker AP, Ellis IO, Elston CW, Nicholson RI, Blamey RW. Invasive lobular carcinomas of the breast–the prognosis of histopathological subtypes. Br J Cancer. 1989;60(4):605–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Fechner RE. Histologic variants of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum Pathol. 1975;6(3):373–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Esposito NN, Chivukula M, Dabbs DJ. The ductal phenotypic expression of the E-cadherin/catenin complex in tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast: an immunohistochemical and clinicopathologic study. Mod Pathol. 2007;20(1):130–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kuroda H, Tamaru J, Takeuchi I, Ohnisi K, Sakamoto G, Adachi A, et al. Expression of E-cadherin, alpha-catenin, and beta-catenin in tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast. Virchows Arch. 2006;448(4):500–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wheeler DT, Tai LH, Bratthauer GL, Waldner DL, Tavassoli FA. Tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast: an analysis of 27 cases of a tumor with a hybrid morphology and immunoprofile. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28(12):1587–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Middleton LP, Palacios DM, Bryant BR, Krebs P, Otis CN, Merino MJ. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma: morphology, immunohistochemistry, and molecular analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000;24(12):1650–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Eusebi V, Magalhaes F, Azzopardi JG. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast: an aggressive tumor showing apocrine differentiation. Hum Pathol. 1992;23(6):655–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. De Leeuw WJ, Berx G, Vos CB, Peterse JL, Van de Vijver MJ, Litvinov S, et al. Simultaneous loss of E-cadherin and catenins in invasive lobular breast cancer and lobular carcinoma in situ. J Pathol. 1997;183(4):404–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Gamallo C, Palacios J, Suarez A, Pizarro A, Navarro P, Quintanilla M, et al. Correlation of E-cadherin expression with differentiation grade and histological type in breast carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 1993;142(4):987–93.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Rasbridge SA, Gillett CE, Sampson SA, Walsh FS, Millis RR. Epithelial (E-) and placental (P-) cadherin cell adhesion molecule expression in breast carcinoma. J Pathol. 1993;169(2):245–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Dabbs DJ, Bhargava R, Chivukula M. Lobular versus ductal breast neoplasms: the diagnostic utility of p120 catenin. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(3):427–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Rakha EA, Patel A, Powe DG, Benhasouna A, Green AR, Lambros MB, et al. Clinical and biological significance of E-cadherin protein expression in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(10):1472–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Sarrio D, Perez-Mies B, Hardisson D, Moreno-Bueno G, Suarez A, Cano A, et al. Cytoplasmic localization of p120ctn and E-cadherin loss characterize lobular breast carcinoma from preinvasive to metastatic lesions. Oncogene. 2004;23(19):3272–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Orvieto E, Maiorano E, Bottiglieri L, Maisonneuve P, Rotmensz N, Galimberti V, et al. Clinicopathologic characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: results of an analysis of 530 cases from a single institution. Cancer. 2008;113(7):1511–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Menon S, Green AR, Lee AH, Ellis IO. Histologic grading is an independent prognostic factor in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;111(1):121–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Rakha EA, Lee AH, Evans AJ, Menon S, Assad NY, Hodi Z, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: further evidence to support its excellent prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(1):99–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Fernandez-Aguilar S, Simon P, Buxant F, Simonart T, Noel JC. Tubular carcinoma of the breast and associated intra-epithelial lesions: a comparative study with invasive low-grade ductal carcinomas. Virchows Arch. 2005;447(4):683–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Goldstein NS, O’Malley BA. Cancerization of small ectatic ducts of the breast by ductal carcinoma in situ cells with apocrine snouts: a lesion associated with tubular carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 1997;107(5):561–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Papadatos G, Rangan AM, Psarianos T, Ung O, Taylor R, Boyages J. Probability of axillary node involvement in patients with tubular carcinoma of the breast. Br J Surg. 2001;88(6):860–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Barkley CR, Ligibel JA, Wong JS, Lipsitz S, Smith BL, Golshan M. Mucinous breast carcinoma: a large contemporary series. Am J Surg. 2008;196(4):549–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Tan PH, Tse GM, Bay BH. Mucinous breast lesions: diagnostic challenges. J Clin Pathol. 2008;61(1):11–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Lacroix-Triki M, Suarez PH, MacKay A, Lambros MB, Natrajan R, Savage K, et al. Mucinous carcinoma of the breast is genomically distinct from invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type. J Pathol. 2010;222(3):282–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Vu-Nishino H, Tavassoli FA, Ahrens WA, Haffty BG. Clinicopathologic features and long-term outcome of patients with medullary breast carcinoma managed with breast-conserving therapy (BCT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62(4):1040–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Yu JI, Choi DH, Park W, Huh SJ, Cho EY, Lim YH, et al. Differences in prognostic factors and patterns of failure between invasive micropapillary carcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: matched case-control study. Breast. 2010;19(3):231–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Luna-More S, Gonzalez B, Acedo C, Rodrigo I, Luna C. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. A new special type of invasive mammary carcinoma. Pathol Res Pract. 1994;190(7):668–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Marchio C, Iravani M, Natrajan R, Lambros MB, Geyer FC, Savage K, et al. Mixed micropapillary-ductal carcinomas of the breast: a genomic and immunohistochemical analysis of morphologically distinct components. J Pathol. 2009;218(3):301–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Wargotz ES, Deos PH, Norris HJ. Metaplastic carcinomas of the breast. II. Spindle cell carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1989;20(8):732–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Wargotz ES, Norris HJ. Metaplastic carcinomas of the breast. III. Carcinosarcoma. Cancer. 1989;64(7):1490–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Wargotz ES, Norris HJ. Metaplastic carcinomas of the breast. I. Matrix-producing carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1989;20(7):628–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Tse GM, Tan PH, Putti TC, Lui PC, Chaiwun B, Law BK. Metaplastic carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathological review. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59(10):1079–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Luini A, Aguilar M, Gatti G, Fasani R, Botteri E, Brito JA, et al. Metaplastic carcinoma of the breast, an unusual disease with worse prognosis: the experience of the European Institute of Oncology and review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;101(3):349–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Tan PH, Jayabaskar T, Chuah KL, Lee HY, Tan Y, Hilmy M, et al. Phyllodes tumors of the breast: the role of pathologic parameters. Am J Clin Pathol. 2005;123(4):529–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Tan PH, Thike AA, Tan WJ, Thu MM, Busmanis I, Li H, et al. Predicting clinical behaviour of breast phyllodes tumours: a nomogram based on histological criteria and surgical margins. J Clin Pathol. 2012;65(1):69–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Caliskan M, Gatti G, Sosnovskikh I, Rotmensz N, Botteri E, Musmeci S, et al. Paget’s disease of the breast: the experience of the European Institute of Oncology and review of the literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112(3):513–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Williams SA, Ehlers 2nd RA, Hunt KK, Yi M, Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, et al. Metastases to the breast from nonbreast solid neoplasms: presentation and determinants of survival. Cancer. 2007;110(4):731–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Alva S, Shetty-Alva N. An update of tumor metastasis to the breast data. Arch Surg. 1999;134(4):450.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Topalovski M, Crisan D, Mattson JC. Lymphoma of the breast. A clinicopathologic study of primary and secondary cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123(12):1208–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Gasilionis V, Ersahin C, Gabram S, Bova D, Branch J, Rajan P. Adrenal cortical carcinoma metastatic to the breast. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59(5):546–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406(6797):747–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(19):10869–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, Hastie T, Marron JS, Nobel A, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(14):8418–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA, Caldas C. Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast cancer: ready for clinical application? J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(29):7350–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Bhargava R, Striebel J, Beriwal S, Flickinger JC, Onisko A, Ahrendt G, et al. Prevalence, morphologic features and proliferation indices of breast carcinoma molecular classes using immunohistochemical surrogate markers. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2009;2(5):444–55.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, Allred DC, Hagerty KL, Badve S, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010;134(6):907–22.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131(1):18–43.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Schnitt SJ, Morrow M. Should intraoperative frozen section evaluation of breast lumpectomy margins become routine practice? Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;138(5):635–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Morrow M, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ. Surgical margins in lumpectomy for breast cancer – bigger is not better. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(1):79–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Hill AD, Tran KN, Akhurst T, Yeung H, Yeh SD, Rosen PP, et al. Lessons learned from 500 cases of lymphatic mapping for breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1999;229(4):528–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, Viale G, Zurrida S, Bedoni M, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet. 1997;349(9069):1864–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Silver Cross Hospital, 1900 Silver Cross Blvd., New Lenox, IL, 60451, USA

    Çağatay H. Erşahin MD, PhD

  2. Department of Pathology, Duff Medical Building, 3575 University Street, Room A5B, Montreal, QC, H3A 2B4, Canada

    Gülbeyaz Ömeroğlu MD & Atilla Ömeroğlu MD

  3. Department of Pathology, McGill University Medical Center, 3575 University Street, Room B18, Montreal, QC, H3A 2B4, Canada

    Gülbeyaz Ömeroğlu MD & Atilla Ömeroğlu MD

  4. Department of Pathology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 South 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA

    Yanxia Li MD, PhD

  5. Department of Pathology, Advocate Christ Hospital and Medical Center, Oak Lawn, IL, USA

    Rasheed Hammadeh MD

Authors
  1. Çağatay H. Erşahin MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gülbeyaz Ömeroğlu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yanxia Li MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rasheed Hammadeh MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Atilla Ömeroğlu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Çağatay H. Erşahin MD, PhD or Gülbeyaz Ömeroğlu MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Advocate Center for Breast Health, Advocate Cancer Institute, Oak Lawn, Illinois, USA

    Adam I. Riker

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Erşahin, Ç.H., Ömeroğlu, G., Li, Y., Hammadeh, R., Ömeroğlu, A. (2015). Atypical and Malignant Breast Pathology. In: Riker, A. (eds) Breast Disease. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1145-5_35

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1145-5_35

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1144-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1145-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation